Personal penalty for alleged smuggled goods set aside where ownership was not proved by direct evidence.

Personal penalty for alleged ownership and smuggled character of seized raw silk yarn was found unsustainable where the record lacked direct evidence that the transport company owner was the actual owner of the goods. Recovered literature and the inability to state the consignor's exact address were insufficient, by themselves, to establish ownership or the smuggled nature of the yarn. On that evidentiary basis, the penalty was set aside and consequential relief followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the personal penalty imposed on the appellant for alleged ownership and smuggled character of the seized raw silk yarn was sustainable on the evidence on record.

Analysis: The appellant was a transport company owner from whose premises a packet of raw silk yarn was seized. The finding of smuggled nature and ownership rested on recovered literature and the appellant's inability to give the exact address of the consignor. The record did not contain direct evidence proving that the appellant was the actual owner of the goods, and the inability to furnish the consignor's correct address was not sufficient, by itself, to establish ownership or smuggled character.

Conclusion: The penalty was not sustainable and was set aside, with the appeal allowed and consequential relief granted to the appellant.

---